Why don't they take Jinmen and Mazu?

Has anyone here ever read Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War.” In a nutshell, it’s the art of deception - never show the enemy your hand, never say what you mean, appear to be incompetent when you’re competent, etc.

So what’s that got to do with this topic? Just this - if they are smart, the PRC should start talking and acting very nice in the months preceding their planned invasion of Taiwan. Belligerence is the last thing they would want to show. Invading Jin/Ma would forever shatter any illusions about what China really is, and Taiwan (and the USA) would be on full alert for years (or decades) thereafter. This would make it much more difficult to invade Taiwan.

No, the PRC should be all sweet and smiley, Taiwan’s best friend - just before they invade. Just like Hitler was Stalin’s best friend before he sent the tanks into Russia.

That’s why I’m not nearly so worried when China threatens to “wash Taiwan in blood” as I’ll be if China starts talking nice.

How much do you want to bet that if China made a great peace gesture towards Taiwan, Chen Shuibian would fall for it hook, line and sinker? He might even be lured to a great “peace conference” in Shanghai, where he could be assassinated just as the invasion was beginning.

Would you buy a used car from Hu Jintao?

regards,
Robert

DISLAIMER: If China invades Jin/Ma next week, I’ll assume that Hu Jintao never read “The Art of War”.

Great post Robert… It makes a lot of sense to me, especially as I know that Chinese always put a lot of faith in such tactics… Strategems of war, anyone?

I guess that it means that we are safe here for now.

[quote=“Mr He”]Great post Robert… It makes a lot of sense to me, especially as I know that Chinese always put a lot of faith in such tactics… Strategems of war, anyone?

I guess that it means that we are safe here for now.[/quote]

Well, I guess you will say that here goes my “fear-mongering” again … but China has toned down its rhetoric a lot. There were no missle tests during the last election, and the PRC cancelled its large-scale military war games this year. Jiang Zemin or Hu Jintao are not the ones to fear … it’s the military leadership. The political structure of the PRC is very unclear, and how much the civilian leadership has control over the military leadership is doubtful at best.

I agree that we are safe here for now too … the PRC still doesn’t have the military advantage over the ROC … yet. But if defense analysts are correct, they will by 2006, and 2010 is the projected year that the ROC will have completed delivery of their major weapons systems purchases from the US, including the four Kidd-class destroyers, eight diesel-electric submarines, additional Patriot PAC3 SAM batteries, PC-3 Orion ASW aircraft, and will have also completed their own upgrades on a variety of systems, increase the number of their M60A3 tanks in order to phase out their large numbers of obselescent M48s, as well as the upgrades to the Hsiung-Feng II and possible delivery of the hotly-debated Hsiung-Feng III (the missle that supposedly will be able to hit cities on the eastern coast of the mainland). That leaves about a four-year window.

Now let’s look at the US “re-deployment.” There are serious discussions of moving a permanent carrier battle group to Guam. This would bring the total number of forward-based carrier groups within the East Asian region to two (the other, being the USS Kitty Hawk is based in Japan). They are re-locating troops out of South Korea, decreasing their numbers by a third. However, there is no talk of even touching the 30,000+ US Marines stationed on Okinawa.

And sorry, Mr. He, but I’m just not as immature and spiteful as you, so no nasty emoticons from me. :wink:

Mao Zedong did, that’s why he was a master strategist and beat the crap out of the Nationalists. (I guess this is where Hobart is going to call me a PRC-loving commie again … :unamused: )

[quote=“LittleBuddhaTW”]
Well, I guess you will say that here goes my “fear-mongering” again … but China has toned down its rhetoric a lot. There were no missle tests during the last election, and the PRC cancelled its large-scale military war games this year. Jiang Zemin or Hu Jintao are not the ones to fear … it’s the military leadership. The political structure of the PRC is very unclear, and how much the civilian leadership has control over the military leadership is doubtful at best. [/quote]

Sorry, but I disagree. Actually, the number of generals in the top rung of the CCP was much higher right after the end of the cultural revolution than it is now, simple because the PLA was the only government organization which survived the cultural revolution more or less intact.

Since then, the number of military met in the top of the CCP has been brought down considerably, basically because the technocrats in power did not want to see their hands forced by the brass-hats.

Also, I remember back in the beginning of the 190’s when Jiang Zemin’s chances of stablizing his position as top leader was doubted, basically because he did not have any military experience or network. However, as events unfolded, you saw him putting his own high level military appointees in place, to the extent where the military is his last remaining power base…

While the political structure of the PRC is somewhat opaque, then a safe bet is that the CCP’s control of the army is rather firm. Mao famous maxim about power growing out of the barrel of a gun is not forgotten by the leadership of the CCP.

OK, China has toned down its rethoric and its military exercises of late, however they have done so before, most notably in the early 1990’s. Moreover, I think that what robert meant was a real olive branch from China… A military exercise cancelled for unknown reasons is but a very faint sign.

[quote=“LittleBuddhaTW”]I agree that we are safe here for now too … the PRC still doesn’t have the military advantage over the ROC … yet. But if defense analysts are correct, they will by 2006, and 2010 is the projected year that the ROC will have completed delivery of their major weapons systems purchases from the US, including the four Kidd-class destroyers, eight diesel-electric submarines, additional Patriot PAC3 SAM batteries, PC-3 Orion ASW aircraft, and will have also completed their own upgrades on a variety of systems, increase the number of their M60A3 tanks in order to phase out their large numbers of obselescent M48s, as well as the upgrades to the Hsiung-Feng II and possible delivery of the hotly-debated Hsiung-Feng III (the missle that supposedly will be able to hit cities on the eastern coast of the mainland). That leaves about a four-year window.

Now let’s look at the US “re-deployment.” There are serious discussions of moving a permanent carrier battle group to Guam. This would bring the total number of forward-based carrier groups within the East Asian region to two (the other, being the USS Kitty Hawk is based in Japan). They are re-locating troops out of South Korea, decreasing their numbers by a third. However, there is no talk of even touching the 30,000+ US marines stationed on Okinawa.[/quote]

In other words, US will be out in force for the next years, while the Taiwanese military gets a major upgrade… hardly a more dangerous situation than the current one, especially singe 1/2 of the window is occupied with Beijing getting ready for the olympics.

Also, you are backing down from the position, which gave you the label “scare-monger”. Should you require another slice of the humble pie, then by all means… help yourself.

I am a tough debater, and in politics and war, all targets are legitimate. If you can’t stand being called a fool, then… Steer clear dear.

Fat chance that anyone making it to the top of the CCP can survive without a very strong grasp of this treatise.

[quote=“Mr He”]In other words, US will be out in force for the next years, while the Taiwanese military gets a major upgrade… hardly a more dangerous situation than the current one, especially singe 1/2 of the window is occupied with Beijing getting ready for the olympics.

Also, you are backing down from the position, which gave you the label “scare-monger”. Should you require another slice of the humble pie, then by all means… help yourself.[/quote]

No … just like the Taiwanese weapons procurements will take until at least 2010, the US re-deployment of forces will also take at least several years. The US will most likely not have sufficiently reposititioned its forces when that 2006 window opens up for China, leaving them currently with the USS Kitty Hawk carrier battle group and the contingent of Marines on Okinawa. Would this be enough or could they arrive fast enough to thwart a PLA invasion? Tough one to call, but with the logistics required, it would take too much time, IMO.

For one, I’m no fool. And secondly, you’re not all that hot of a debater either because you, like Hobart, refuse to even attempt to look at the other side of an argument from an objective point of view (much like many European governments of late). :loco:

It seems to me, that China invading Jinmena and Mazu would be the perfect opportunity for Taiwan to declare indpendence without being the ones who upset the ‘status quo’.

Brian

The Art of War was written over 2,500 years ago. People put so much stock in contemporary Chinese having some sort of almost prenatural understanding of culture, arts and religion (I think either this is the “inscrutability” of the Chinese or the secret of Calgonite).
I think this is basically bullshit. China produced some interesting thinkers and inventions, but Chinese of today (regardless of what side of the Strait you wish to think of) have rested on these laurels for centuries.
I’d expect leaders in China to be reading the instructions on a can of Campbell’s soup as being able to keenly apply the thoughts of Sun Tzu.
What was the last creative strategy used by China to try to resolve the “Taiwan issue” in their favor? They are a one-trick pony; I can’t think of any evidence of craftiness on their part.

“The Art of War” was one of the cornerstones of Mao Zedong’s military strategy. Chiang Kai-Shek was also known to possess a rare set of commentaries on the ancient classic. Ho Chi Minh had the book translated into Vietnamese to train his troops and based many of his military strategies on it. Mao Zedong and Ho Chi Minh both used it successfully (so much so that American Marine Corps General Samuel B. Griffith III had it translated into English). Chiang Kai-Shek apparently did not use it so well …

“The Art of War” as well as Miyamoto Musashi’s “A Book of Five Rings” have always been important books in my martial arts libraries. Definitely both good reads … But I think Chinese military strategy since the death of Mao is looking more towards the West. Chinese analysts watched the 1991 Persian Gulf War, the NATO war in Kosovo, and more recently the second Persian Gulf War and invasion of Afghanistan. This is where they realized they needed to increase the numbers and training of their special forces.

Well, honestly… They are trying to weaken the Taiwanese by getting as many Taishang is as they can… trying to get into the media too… but it’s incomplete… What I meant when I aired my suspicions regarding the art of war and Hu Jintoa, then I was beating on the fact that you need to be a very skilled manipulator and a masterful policician in order to climb to the upper rungs of the CCP. Whether that means that you will apply the same skillfullness once you are there is a completely different matter.

Let’s see… A few thousand US marines posted on Taiwan waiting for the Chinese troops to land? Oh, so China has a golden opportunity to get in war with the US. Sure I would jump on that, if I were then… Better get me and my buddies out of Beijing first, though. After all, a barrage of cruiser missiles is likely to hit the town.

Also… A US carrier battle group is hardly a small force, BTW. Pilots better trained than the Chinese flying better and more modern airplanes… They alonw should be able to deny the Chinese anything remotely resembling air superiority for as long as it would take to get 2 more carrier battle groups to the area. Also, one would imagine that they would send a sizeable part of the Chinese invasion fleet to the bottom of the sea - and transform their supply lines to rubble, aided by whatever else the US, Taiwan, and possible Japan has sitting around in the neighborhood.

Secondly, you seem to assume that a Chinese attack on Taiwan will be a bolt out of the blue. That’s hardly likely to be the case. They will need months, and that might just be enough to get 50.000 US troops on station in Okinawa or Guam, ready for a quick redeployment to Taiwan. Obviously, another carrier battle group or 2 would be somewhat faster to get here - if I remember correctly, they had 2 of them around Taiwan during the presidential election in 1996.

[quote=“LittleBuddhaTW”]For one, I’m
no
fool. And secondly, you’re not all that hot of a debater either because you, like Hobart, refuse to even attempt to look at the other side of an argument from an objective point of view (much like many European governments of late). :loco: [/quote]

I know the “other side” of the argument that you are presenting, namely that China will be able to walk over the Taiwanese defence in 2 years.

I don’t think that the Taiwanese defence will be better than the PLA on December 31, 2005 and worse a day later. Also, the US security umbrella is strong enough for some semi-defensive work here already, after all the only ground they need to put soldiers on in a meaningful way is the friendly shores for Formosa - and the welcome here should be a bit warmer than the one received in Iraq, I presume. As I mentioned before, the US carrier battle groups are hardly toy ships. An increased beefing up of the US military presence here is also a gradual process.

Remember operation desert shield in 1991?

It was a matter of weeks, before the US had a credible defence in Saudi Arabia. While the PLA may be stronger than Saddam’s armies, then the natural obstacles they face are a bit more daunting - harder to get hte armor over the Taiwan strait.

Also… Stop ranting about European governments, will you? Also, no reason to state that you aren’t a fool, unless you believe that we need reassurance on that particular subject.

The USS Kitty Hawk is the only permanently forward-deployed aircraft carrier, based in Yokosuka, Japan. As such, it is always maintained at a high state of alert. However, even at such a high state of readiness, it would still take 4-5 days for it to prepare to even leave port. That doesn’t even count the time it would take for the US administration to make a decision whether or not to intervene. By the time it reached the Taiwan straits, the war could be over. This is based on US Defense Department analyses that say Taiwan could hold out for about a week, and even Taiwan’s own computer simulations that say Taipei could fall in about six days. If they were able to get there in time, then yes, the PLAAN would be in for big trouble. The big question that remains is, will the US get involved? If it is a provoked attack (i.e. the Taiwanese government unilaterally moving to change the status quo), then they have no obligation to defend Taiwan.

The 30,000+ US Marines based in Okinawa is a good deterrent force, but in a lightning attack that is carried out by a large-scale tactical ballistic missle strike, special forces/airborne troops, and a massive air bombardment, there wouldn’t be much of a ground war anyway. Once that happened, the Chinese would dig in, and an amphibious invasion that the Marines would have to undertake (and they would need to wait for back up, weeks at the earliest for a further two or three amphibious assault groups to arrive) would not be so easy. They would win, but there wouldn’t be much of Taiwan left.

That’s most likely what the case would be. A massive amphibious invasion would be easy to see and prepare for, but a surprise missle strike and decapitation attack by special forces and airborne troops would give them 30-60 minutes warning at most. Considering half the island is split on the issue of reunification, after the first wave of missles, how strong will the will of the Taiwanese regular forces be to fight?

Remember, the Taiwanese military is a conscription force. Most of the kids don’t want to be there and are just waiting to get out and start making money or get back to their girlfriends. With only 18 months of service, by the time they get them properly trained, it’s time for them to leave. This isn’t the way to put together a credible fighting force. Taiwan needs to move quickly to develop an all-professional military. Next, from friends in the military, Taiwan has a lot of equipment, but much of it is in storage because they 1) can’t keep it maintained, and 2) there aren’t enough fully trained soldiers to use it. Their fighters are a good example: the F-16s and Mirage 2000s are good planes, but they don’t have enough pilots to fill them up, and those that do get up in the air and shoot down a bunch of PLAAF plans may not have a landing strip to fly back to if it gets wiped out by a tactical ballistic missle.

If the Taiwanese can hold out for a couple of weeks on their own, yes. Some say the Taiwanese would need to hold out for a month. Unfortunately, the US Defense Department doesn’t think Taiwan will be able to hold out for more than seven days. Hence the reason they’re pushing Taiwan so hard to pass the weapons procurement package AND to overhaul the entire structure of the Taiwanese military. The US military has been pushing these reforms for years but the Taiwanese military mentality is slow to change.

The problem is, the Taiwanese may not be able to hold out for “a matter of weeks.” And this isn’t just my opinion, but that of the US Defense Department’s annual defense report on the China-Taiwan military situation and the Taiwanese’s own computer analyses. Secondly, you’re still talking about a massive Normandy-style amphibious assault by the PLA on Taiwan. IF the Chinese invade, it won’t be that kind of attack.

And why not make a comment about the European governments? I don’t see any of them willing to support Taiwan’s defense. They’re scared shitless of the Taiwanese to sell or even help them procure the technology to mount a credible defense. The Americans are the only ones who seem to care (and I think the Japanese are beginning to take much more of an interest now too, thankfully!)

Here are links to the 2000 and 2002 US Defense Department reports to Congress on China’s military capabilities and the Taiwanese ability to defend itself. You can read the reports for yourself:

defenselink.mil/news/Jun2000 … 222000.htm
defenselink.mil/news/Jul2002 … 2china.pdf

Here’s another interesting report from Taiwan’s National Policy Foundation on Chen’s “incitement” of Beijing and how willing the US would be to bailing him out if he is deemed the instigator:

npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/NS/09 … 91-264.htm

And here’s yet another interesting article for your perusal:

spacewar.com/2004/040425014148.ifv273vv.html

And finally, an article on Taiwan’s own war games simulation that shows Taiwan could hold out for about 6 days:

china.news.designerz.com/taiwan- … -days.html

[quote=“LittleBuddhaTW”]
China.news.designerz.com/taiwan- … -days.html[/quote]

Normandy-style invasion. According to yourself quite unlikely.

deleted

[quote=“Mr He”][quote=“LittleBuddhaTW”]
China.news.designerz.com/taiwan- … -days.html[/quote]

Normandy-style invasion. According to yourself quite unlikely.[/quote]

Which just goes to show that even with such an out-dated attack strategy the ROC forces could still only hold out for six days.

[quote=“LittleBuddhaTW”]

Which just goes to show that even with such an out-dated attack strategy the ROC forces could still only hold out for six days.[/quote]

You are assuming that they actually manage to land a considerable land force first down south, something which is far from certain, even according to yourself. :noway:

Now, while their missiles in Fujian may inflict considerable damage on Taiwan, what will they do, if the Taiwanese command structure and most of their defence remains intact? Then China has fired all her shots, and well… the decapitation didn’t work out… In that case you will have a stalemate, and not a clear Chinese victory.

Sharp debater, huh?

[quote=“Mr He”]You are assuming that they actually manage to land a considerable land force first down south, something which is far from certain, even according to yourself. :noway:
[/quote]

No, that’s not what I’m assuming at all. I think that’s the least likely of their strategies because it has the largest probability of failure. I have said before on multiple occasions that it will be a lightning attack using a missle barrage, special forces, and airborne troops initially. If they can take Taipei and take out the leadership and command/control, the war is virtually over. The amphibious landing would come later once the fighting had calmed down and would be to reinforce and perform mop-up operations. Go back and read my previous posts before you misquote me.

With 600 missles (and their accuracy being improved by European and stolen US technology) and their numbers growing every day, that is very unlikely. Have you worked closely with the Taiwanese military? What is the average soldier’s will to fight? How professional and well-trained are the regular troops that form the majority of the ROC military? Do you even read any of the defense analyses (both Taiwanese and US)? Or are you a defense expert that gives you a much more believeable opinion than the best analysts in the world. Something tells me you aren’t …

Show me some scenarios or reports that suggest your “theory” is more likely than what the US Defense Department and the Taiwanese military have said themselves, and then I’ll believe you.

So far it seems much sharper than you, since you still seem to be living in the late 1930s when Europe had their heads stuck in the sand until Hitler had taken over everything except for Russia and had to wait for the Americans to come bail them out … no wait, that happened TWICE. Silly me, I keep forgetting. :unamused:

[quote=“LittleBuddhaTW”]
No, that’s not what I’m assuming at all. I think that’s the least likely of their strategies because it has the largest probability of failure. I have said before on multiple occasions that it will be a lightning attack using a missle barrage, special forces, and airborne troops initially. If they can take Taipei and take out the leadership and command/control, the war is virtually over. The amphibious landing would come later once the fighting had calmed down and would be to reinforce and perform mop-up operations. Go back and read my previous posts before you misquote me.[/quote]

You are a bit garbled, and please… What they referred to in the piece was the aftermath of a conventional landing. Remember, that while a missile can take out a building, even 100o of them can’t take out the heavy armor used by the Taiwan army. Also, special forces are good for specialized operations like for instance taking out a president or a power plant, if you land them on the island expecting them to take care of a division of M60 tanks, then they will fail. Also, airborne troops are usually not armed with tanks and stuff… They will therefore stand a scant chance of defeating the much larger Taiwanese forces. (Even with their best abilities, then can’t airdrop 200,000 heavily armed soldiers here).

In other words, you should read the links you post through before using them.

Oh, it’s spelled missile by the way…

Well, you assume that they will not fight when their home is attacked. That’s a stupid observation at best. Honestly, I think they will fight… After all, they are fighting for their home.

Also, don’t assume that the Chinese army is better trained or motivated. While the PLA has a few crack units, then the majority of them are not. You are looking at semi-literate peasants for chrissakes.

Well, the newest us threat assessment (link posted by yuo, so no need to repost) wrote this:

OK, they only have 100 planes who on a technical level approaches the Taiwanese Mirage, IDF, and F16 planes

[quote] … The army’s ability to to project force much beyond China’s land borders remains limited due to a shortage of amphibious ships, heavy cargo carrying aircraft, long-range transports, and other logistical
shortcomings… [/quote]

The PLA soldiers will need to swim across the strait in order to get here…

OK, little buddha, not only do the Taiwanese have more planes, the Chinese seem to be unable to operate the few they got properly.

OK, the Chinese have many soldiers, but they need to get them here as well. They still son’t have the ability to do that.

If you want more quotes from the material you were so friendly to provide me with, then by all means, I will happily oblige.

Stop rambling you little fool.

Also, please answer the following questions:

  1. have I said that the Taiwanese defence should rest on their laurels and not buy additional hardware.

  2. Have i said that Taiwan should stop reforming and improving their forces?

  3. Since you seem to believe that I am a fan of Neville Chamberlain’s way of dealing with Nazi Germany, then please… show where I suggested that we should accomodate China, the way UK and France accomodated Hitler’s expansionist designs on Austria, The Czech Republic, and Saar.

Please, don’t sport your ignorance about European history on the Taiwanese politics forum.[/quote][/b]